Sanitation by ultrasonic cavitation of steel mesh gloves used in the meat industry

The microbiological condition of steel mesh gloves commonly used in the meat industry was assessed and an adequate sanitation protocol devised in the course of three experiments conducted in the boning room of a beef packaging operation. The first pilot-experiment monitored the average bacterial load of gloves at various times during the working day, by releasing the tissue trapped inside the gloves through ultrasonic cavitation. After 2, 4, and 6 h of boning, steel mesh gloves contained ca. 9.1 and 8.3 log10 CFU/g mesophilic and psychrotrophic organisms, respectively. Enterobacteriaceae colony counts varied from ca. 5.5 to 8.5 log10 CFU/g. In the second experiment ultrasonic cavitation was followed by disinfection in a 2% Halamid® (sodium paratoluene sulfonchloramide) solution for 5 min. Aerobic mesophilic and psychrotrophic colony counts after 2 h of boning were still 7.4 and 6.7 log10 CFU/g, respectively, while the average Enterobactericeae colony count was 4.9 log10 CFU/g. In the third experiment gloves were subjected to a protocol including: 1) cleaning by ultrasonic cavitation in the presence of a suitable detergent for 5 min, 2) rinsing with tap water, 3) disinfection in a 2% Halamid® solution for 5 min, and 4) rinsing with tap water. This resulted in counts below the limits of detection for aerobic organisms and Enterobacteriaceae . After 2 h of boning the average mesophilic and psychrotrophic aerobic colony counts were ca. 5.5 and 4.9 log10 CFU/g, respectively and the Enterobacteriaceae colony count ca. 3.9 log10 CFU/g. This contrasted sharply with the much higher levels observed when no sanitation protocol was followed. Hence the developed protocol reduces the risk of cross-contamination by steel mesh gloves considerably

Chemical hazards in foods of animal origin

In 25 chapters the various chemical hazards - 'avoidable' or 'unavoidable' and possibly prevailing in major foods of animal origin [muscle foods (including fish), milk and dairy, eggs, honey] - are identified and characterised, the public health risks associated with the ingestion of animal food products that may be contaminated with such xenobiotic chemical substances are discussed in detail, and options for risk mitigation are presented

The effect of vitamin E supplementation on drip loss of bovine longissimus lumborum, psoas major and semitendinosus muscles

The effect of dietary vitamin E supplementation (2150 1U/head/day) on drip loss and related quality traits of bovine M. longissimus lumborum, M. psoas major and M. semitendinosus was examined. The effect of vitamin E supplementation on drip loss seemed to depend on muscle studied. Drip loss of longissimus muscles was not significantly influenced, whereas supplemented semitendinosus muscles lost significantly less (p < 0.05) and supplemented psoas major muscles significantly more (p < 0.05) drip than did control counterparts. In both supplemented and control samples, sarcolemma failure occurred. No ultimate pH differences were detected between control and supplemented samples regardless of the muscle considered. In supplemented semitendinosus muscles, the decrease in drip loss was accompanied by an increase of sarcoplasmic protein solubility and sarcomere length. It is discussed that both these variables may be related to the stability of mitochondria and sarcoplasmic reticulum, as affected by dietary supplementation of vitamin E. However, this view deserves further investigation and more evidence is needed to establish the mechanism by which vitamin E influences drip loss

Modified-atmosphere storage under subatmospheric pressure and beef quality: II. Color, drip, cooking loss, sarcomere length, and tenderness

Beef has a requirement for refrigerated storage up to 14 d to achieve adequate aging and a tender product. To achieve this aging with little spoilage and no surface drying, vacuum packaging is attractive, because it is inherently simple and offers a clear indication to the packer when the process has failed or there is risk of spoilage. However, there is increasing pressure on the meat industry to limit the use of packaging materials in view of their cost and the cost involved in their recovery and recycling. The purpose of this report was to evaluate an alternative storage system in containers using modified atmospheres at reduced pressure (approximately 25 kPa). The quality of the meat for both container- and vacuum-packed treatments was measured during chilled storage for up to 3 wk. Storage time had the most significant effect on quality characteristics, irrespective of the packaging method. Storage in containers under a 70%N-2:30%CO2 gas mixture gave characteristics similar to beef stored under vacuum. Storage in containers under 100% CO2 produced less drip loss than under 70%N-2:30%CO2, but generally container storage produced 3 times as much drip loss as vacuum packaging. Shear force of the LM was unaffected by the type of packaging, and at d 2 after slaughter (i.e., before the storage trial was begun), sarcomere lengths of muscles intended for container storage were similar to those destined for vacuum storage. During the packaging treatment, the comparison between the storage systems was always done within 1 animal using one carcass-half for container storage and the other half for vacuum packaging; all bulls were shackled from the left hindleg during bleeding. The majority of the muscles from the left sides had lower shear force values than those from the right sides at the earlier storage times (2 and 9 d after slaughter) but had similar values after longer storage (16 and 23 d after slaughter). This is the first report that shackling beef carcasses from the left side can result in more tender meat in the LM from that side. The increased tenderness in the LM from the shackled side probably resulted from an early decrease in pH and an increase in calpain activity after mechanical strain of the muscles on the shackled side. This effect of shackling should be taken into account when designing systematic comparisons of tenderness in beef